Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The USA's foreign Policy (or the unacceptable face of capatilism)

  1. Jun 3, 2005 #1

    Art

    User Avatar

    The USA's foreign Policy (or the unacceptable face of capitalism)

    I've moved this from the USSR thread as it doesn't belong there


    Originally Posted by sid_galt
    "I advise you to look at the cynical and biased nature of your post which has been provided without ANY justification.

    Odds are, without the USA, you might have been slaving under Communism. Hate me for saying it but it's true."

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    You mean as opposed to slaving under one of the many dictatorships the USA has supported

    This list includes only direct intervention of a military nature by the USA in other countries' affairs since world war 2. If you include economic and covert actions the list becomes huge.

    Year Country Action Taken


    1947 Greece Military Backing
    1948 Peru Military Backing
    1948 Vietnam Military Backing
    1948 Nicaragua Military Backing
    1950 Korea Killing Civilians
    1950 Puerto Rico Military Action
    1954 Vietnam Military Backing
    1957 Jordan Military Training
    1958 Lebanon Military Action
    1959 Haiti Military Action
    1961 Cuba Secret Invasion
    1962 Vietnam Military Action
    1964 North Vietnam Bombing
    1964 Panama Military Action
    1965 Vietnam Military Action
    1965 Thailand Military Aid
    1965 Peru Military Aid
    1966 Laos Bombing
    1967 Vietnam Military Action
    1969 Cambodia Secret Bombing
    1969 Vietnam Military Action
    1970 North Vietnam Bombing
    1970 Oman Military Assistance.
    1971 Laos Invasion
    1971 Vietnam Military Action
    1972 North Vietnam Blockade; Bombing
    1972 Nicaragua Troops
    1973 Cambodia Bombing
    1974 Vietnam Trade Embargo
    1974 Zaire Military Aid
    1975 East Timor Support of Invasion
    1975 Morocco Support of Invasion
    1976 Indonesia Military Aid
    1976 Philippines Military Aid
    1977 Pakistan Military Aid
    1977 Zaire Military Aid
    1977 Indonesia Military Aid
    1978 Guatemala Military Aid;
    1979 Afghanistan Military Aid
    1979 Cambodia Aid to Khmer Rouge
    1979 Yemen Military Aid
    1980 El Salvador Military Aid
    1980 Honduras Troops
    1980 Iraq Military Aid
    1980 Cambodia Military Aid
    1980 South Korea Military Aid;
    1981 El Salvador Military Aid
    1982 Lebanon Troops
    1982 Guatemala Military Aid
    1982 Afghanistan Military Aid
    1982 Iraq Military
    1983 Lebanon Troops;
    1983 Nicaragua Blockade; Arming Rebels
    1985 Chad Military Aid;
    1985 Honduras Military Aid;
    1986 Nicaragua Military Aid
    1986 Libya Bombing Terrorism To destabilise the country.
    1988 Iraq Military Aid
    1988 Colombia Military Aid
    1988 El Salvador Military Aid
    1988 Turkey Military Aid
    1989 El Salvador Military Aid
    1989 Panama Invasion;
    1989 Cambodia Military Aid
    1990 El Salvador Military Training
    1990 Guatemala Military Aid
    1991 Iraq Invasion;
    1992 Somalia Invasion .
    1992 Angola Military Aid
    1993 Iraq Bombing
    1994 Haiti Troops;
    1994 Colombia Military Aid
    1995 Turkey Military Aid
    1995 Mexico Military Aid
    1997 Rwanda Military Aid
    1998 Afghanistan Bombing
    1998 Sudan Bombing
    1998 Turkey Military Aid
    1998 Guatemala Military Aid
    1999 Yugoslavia Bombing
    1999 Iraq Bombing
    1999 Guatemala Military Aid
    2000 Israel Military Aid;
    2001 Colombia Military Aid
    2001 Iraq Sanctions; Bombing
    2001 Afghanistan Bombing;
    2002 Afghanistan Bombing;
    2003 Iraq Invasion

    That enough justification for you?
     
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2005
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 3, 2005 #2
    in fact that list is incomplete,, i can't see any of the terrorist dictatorships of latin america in the 70'. trained in the school of americas and suported by US..


    PD: i love this one >>> 1988 Iraq Military Aid :yuck:
     
  4. Jun 3, 2005 #3

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Wow, not sure how many times ive seen that ignorant list in the last few months but it gets rather tiresome. Anyone remotely familiar with history knows the correct justification for most matters listed on this thread. This list is simply intended to fool the ignorant into thinking the US is somehow bullying the world around. Where is hte list of the UN campaigns? Why dont you list say, a US president's assassination attempt next to its correct year or UN resolution next to its correct years?

    Simply more uninformed rhetoric that removes the facts and hopes the reader will draw the incorrect conclusion
     
  5. Jun 3, 2005 #4
    here are the assassination attempts against foreign leaders since WWII:
    1949 - Kim Koo, Korean opposition leader
    1950s - CIA/Neo-Nazi hit list of more than 200 political figures in West Germany to be "put out of the way" in the event of a Soviet invasion
    1950s - Chou En-lai, Prime minister of China, several attempts on his life
    1950s, 1962 - Sukarno, President of Indonesia
    1951 - Kim Il Sung, Premier of North Korea
    1953 - Mohammed Mossadegh, Prime Minister of Iran
    1950s (mid) - Claro M. Recto, Philippines opposition leader
    1955 - Jawaharlal Nehru, Prime Minister of India
    1957 - Gamal Abdul Nasser, President of Egypt
    1959, 1963, 1969 - Norodom Sihanouk, leader of Cambodia
    1960 - Brig. Gen. Abdul Karim Kassem, leader of Iraq
    1950s-70s - José Figueres, President of Costa Rica, two attempts on his life
    1961 - Francois "Papa Doc" Duvalier, leader of Haiti
    1961 - Patrice Lumumba, Prime Minister of the Congo (Zaire)
    1961 - Gen. Rafael Trujillo, leader of Dominican Republic
    1963 - Ngo Dinh Diem, President of South Vietnam
    1960s-70s - Fidel Castro, President of Cuba, many attempts on his life
    1960s - Raúl Castro, high official in government of Cuba
    1965 - Francisco Caamaño, Dominican Republic opposition leader
    1965-6 - Charles de Gaulle, President of France
    1967 - Che Guevara, Cuban leader
    1970 - Salvador Allende, President of Chile
    1970 - Gen. Rene Schneider, Commander-in-Chief of Army, Chile
    1970s, 1981 - General Omar Torrijos, leader of Panama
    1972 - General Manuel Noriega, Chief of Panama Intelligence
    1975 - Mobutu Sese Seko, President of Zaire
    1976 - Michael Manley, Prime Minister of Jamaica
    1980-1986 - Muammar Qaddafi, leader of Libya, several plots and attempts upon his life
    1982 - Ayatollah Khomeini, leader of Iran
    1983 - Gen. Ahmed Dlimi, Moroccan Army commander
    1983 - Miguel d'Escoto, Foreign Minister of Nicaragua
    1984 - The nine comandantes of the Sandinista National Directorate
    1985 - Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, Lebanese Shiite leader (80 people killed in the attempt)
    1991 - Saddam Hussein, leader of Iraq
    1993 - Mohamed Farah Aideed, prominent clan leader of Somalia
    1998, 2001-2 - Osama bin Laden, leading Islamic militant
    1999 - Slobodan Milosevic, President of Yugoslavia
    2002 - Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, Afghan Islamic leader and warlord
    2003 - Saddam Hussein and his two sons
     
  6. Jun 3, 2005 #5

    Art

    User Avatar

    I didn't include indirect support such as training etc as the list would become too long.

    Incidentally the point of this thread is not to criticise the American people but their government's foreign policy which has remained relatively unchanged throughout successive administrations and to try to highlight the differences between the way a lot of Americans view their interventions abroad and the way the rest of the world views them.
     
  7. Jun 3, 2005 #6

    Art

    User Avatar

    As you are obviously very au fait and knowledable about this information and therefore not one of the ignorant here's a little test for you. Can you provide the details and the reasons behind oh, let's say the first 6 items on this list?
     
  8. Jun 3, 2005 #7

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Well its rather obvious to anyone with even the smallest historical knowledge such as me as to what many of htese things are. 1950 korea? Korean war eh? Ever heard of it? It was UN war in the first place.

    1960, Cuba... a few dozen nuclear missiles are being assembled 70 miles off our coastline... does that ring a bell? Why would you omit such information unless you were trying to decieve someone?

    Most of the southeast asian conflicts were the result of a doctrine that resulted in a few thousand nuclear missiles being pointed at us... again... why would you omit such information?

    And lets see... oh i guess bombing terrorists that attempt to and succeed in killing americans is a bad thing... guess we're pretty guilty of a horrible crime there

    Oh and theres the assassination attempt on a US president.... oh and theres even mroe UN-ordered bombings... my my... yet all this information is omitted from the list. Why on earth would that be? I guess you need to really leave out the facts if you want to turn people against the US...
     
  9. Jun 3, 2005 #8

    Art

    User Avatar

    The test was to give the details and reasons behind the first 6 items on the list. As you haven't / can't do so I guess that classifies you as one of the ignorant people you referred to.
     
  10. Jun 3, 2005 #9
    What's your point, Art? What are you claiming?
     
  11. Jun 3, 2005 #10

    Art

    User Avatar

    Simply that the world including the American homeland would be a more peaceful place if American citizens were to question more deeply the foreign policies of their government and the motivations behind these policies.
     
  12. Jun 3, 2005 #11
    the US had nukes in turkey at the time, pointing straight at the soviet heartland. same with britain. the warsaw pact was created in response to the US creating nato.

    the facts are out there if you want to know what they are. there's no reason for this ignorance, unless you just want to be ignorant & misinformed.

    well i wouldn't oppose apprehending terrorists who attack/kill civilians, american or not. i can totally understand why terrorists would want to do such things though, it's no wonder when you look at what the US has done to people in other countries. off the top of my head there's 100000 people liberated in iraq, for example, or millions of starving homeless refugees in afghanistan.
     
  13. Jun 3, 2005 #12
    Pengwuino, provide evidence for what you say. "Anyone remotely familiar with history knows the correct justification for most matters listed on this thread". Well, ok - I don't know the history you refer to. Please enlighten me (with reputable references, please). Oh, and another request: will you please stop making these personal attacks - stop calling people who disagree with you 'ignorant'; this is not the way intelligent arguments are conducted.
     
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2005
  14. Jun 3, 2005 #13
    Well put, Art - I want to state that this is my intention as well (I've already stated this in other discussions, but it does not hurt to reiterate my position).
     
  15. Jun 3, 2005 #14
    Sounds like a politician's statement. Come on, out with it - what are your claims as to the foreign policies of the US administration and the motives behind them?
     
  16. Jun 3, 2005 #15
    Pengwuino, please provide your sources of information. How do you KNOW this? And nobody is trying to turn people against 'the US' - what does that mean, in any case? Did anyone say anything about American people? No! Nobody said 'Americans are bad/evil'. We are not arguing about silly things. We are trying to look at the big picture to see what's really happened in the past so that we can understand what's happening now. It is what we do: we try to understand things by being informed and by questioning and not blindly accepting what the powerful want us to believe. That is what thinking people do - and that's all we're trying to do.
     
  17. Jun 3, 2005 #16
    You can understand why someone would want to kill civilians, but you cannot understand the causes of the US actions in Afghanistan and Iraq?
     
  18. Jun 3, 2005 #17
    Yonoz, I'm answering on my own behalf (not anyone else's - others can speak for themselves).

    I will come out with what I am trying to point out here: it is my understanding that capitalism is by its nature destructive. Capitalism (and its representatives - the US administration, the UK admininstration, etc) causes wars, death, suffering, environmental degradation, social dislocation, etc. It deprives humanity of resources that could be better used for our further development.

    It is in the name of securing cheap resources (raw materials such as oil) and lucrative contracts that many wars are fought. Very few people benefit from these wars (the very rich do) and many, many ordinary people suffer as a result of them - either by dying or by having their taxes spent on killing people or because of depleted uranium used in the new 'hotshot' weapons that great minds are totally wasting their potential developing.

    It makes me furious to think about the brain-power being expended on developing 'better' ways to kill human beings when these minds could be working on important things like solving our environmental problems.

    I have nothing against the ordinary people who live in any country whatsoever who do not have the power to make these devastating decisions, though I do wish they would question their social institutions and the prevalent ideology critically so we can get over this disgusting phase of social (dis)organisation that depends on killing and general mayhem and get on with doing worthwhile things. There - please feel free to question me further if I did not make myself clear.
     
  19. Jun 3, 2005 #18
    Yonoz, is this a serious question? Tell me, why Iraq? And please, do NOT say 'WMD' or '9/11'. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, and there were no WMDs. So ok, why Iraq?
     
  20. Jun 3, 2005 #19
    Anyone familiar with history who is not ignorant and is not fooled by propaganda can see the truth, which always lies somewhere in between. All powers do good and bad things, and the US is no exception. Without critical views (as allowed by democracy) power would corrupt and there would be no balance or possibility for improvement.
    And therefore I agree with this conclusion.

    Ironically the ability for discussion on these topics is an exercise of democracy that right-wing people seem to want to suppress, or at the minimum seem to over react to, probably because it threatens their neat little perceptions of the world. I believe I speak for several members in saying how tiring it is to keep reading posts that reflect this mentality.
     
  21. Jun 3, 2005 #20
    1947.greek Civil war...Britain sent 40,000 troops to Greece and gave financial aid to the government, which became dependent on Great Britain's military to stay in power. On 21 February 1947 the British announced that they would cease providing aid to Greece and Turkey, and would not continue its support after March 31, 1947, the day of Greek elections. The UK was rebuilding after WW2, and simply needed the man power back home.
    Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, and Albania were channeling Russian weapons/support/aid into greece.
    Our government {USA}could see no end to the communist push. Each gain,would serve as a stepping stone from which to try another; and a large part of the world, still suffering from the ravages of war{remember greece was blown to bits by the germans}, offered opportunities for further Soviet conquest.
    The American response was a policy of containment, of blocking any extension of Communist influence.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: The USA's foreign Policy (or the unacceptable face of capatilism)
  1. Policy Differences (Replies: 0)

Loading...